Talk:Ahri/@comment-25223119-20170202191709/@comment-4091261-20170210192250
Exactly, I think its just the intuition of the current meta working against the players. is not a monster to deal with if one designs themselves to defeat her--essentially raping her early game while having all the beefy dudes do all the dirty diving work while the backline jumps in to finish her off later on. It's important to remember the uncertainty of statistics, however at a certain point we can make guarantees about probabilities based on statistics. Given that probability is innately uncertain, we know this for a fact. If we flip a coin one time, we aren't going to guess the probability. However, if we flip the coin 100 times, chances are we can guess the probability. Especially if we graph the revised probability after each coin toss because the curve will be oscillating around the limit. There is a proper term for this, but I don't remember its name. Anyways, its relevance to this is that even though winrates don't mean much normally, if we are talking about winrates on multiple trials then there is meaning. If you look at winrate against champions of 100+ games on the day of this post, its clear to see that she is high against most champions and low against few. This can be shown even on the case of 250+ games so it is a actually a stretch to say the probability is a fluke. In the end, all it is saying is that there are a variety of champions who she is consistently beating, while there are not that many who consistently beat her. It does not give light to the exact reason and its up for others to interpret. I think the big issue people have is that many can recognize problems yet see that even though there are problems, Rito isn't fixing every single one of them. One thing I think we need to really pay attention to is that the top priority of Rito would be to fix outliers. If there is any one outlier, both extremely overpowered or cripplingly pathetic, then that is something that Rito must fix. The next priority of Rito is fixing skew. If the performance of a certain category of champions is doing excessively well or poorly for any reason, it is up to them to figure out what is the cause of this and making amendments keep the performance of every champion centered. Anything past that isn't Rito's concern. Is it cause they are heartless bastards? Is it because they aren't Super Man, and can't fix everything? No, it's actually because they simply don't want to intrude on matters that players can fix on their own. If there isn't a skew on the champions' class and the champion isn't an outlier, then the obstacle is not impossible to overcome since the champion adheres to the norms. Despite this fact, I do want to bring to light an innate skew just based on human intuition: meta sheep. ---- Meta sheep is basically the concept that people will conform to what performs the best. What this does is it skews the data towards high performing champions. The issue this brings up, and I'm sure anyone can clearly see, is that it shoves the other champions who are on the lower end of the spectrum out of the mix completely. The reason being is that even though high performing champions are not individually difficult to defeat, the odds are still skewed in the favor of a team with a group of highly performing champions vs. a team with a group of poorly performing champions. To fix this, It would be curve for the performance of champions overall to be fairly narrow, i.e. everyone performs relatively the same. If every champion performs relatively the same, this will increase the flexibility of the champion pool vastly and allow anyone to play their favorite champion and expect to do what they were intended to do. I'm sure this is what Riot strives for in general, but Rito doesn't ever accomplish it for fairly significant reasons. #They are Riot Games, not the Justice League. That said, the amount of manpower they would need in the balance team to handle this large of a pool is tremendous. #Synergies with other champions and items complicate the matter much more than we would like. So a nerf on an item may immediately cause a skew to a whole subset of champions who rely on an item or a buff on a champion with good setup capability will skew a whole subset of champions who utilize the setups well. The big thing we need to think about here is just how big of a task Rito handles. We average players want them to fix a couple champions. Riot wants to fix ALL champions. It wouldn't be an issue of us average players want them to fix a couple specific champions, but the spread of what we want them to fix always changes given the scales always change. So in the end what happens is that us average players, as a whole, want them to fix ALL of the champions. ---- Fixing every champion in the game is not an easy task, especially when they need to deal with the meta sheep popularity skew. So while Rito is busy dealing with the overall picture, it is our responsibility to fix the individual issues. We would like to be led on the path of victory, but we need to remember that in a competition, victory is not supposed to be certain. Thus we are responsible for understanding/implementing tactics and adjusting runes/masteries/summoner spells. Now, one thing we are responsible for that I am not a fan of at all, is the champion we choose. I feel that it is this responsibility that causes us to become the meta sheep and kills the diversity of this game in that the top 4 most popular champions we will see in every single game while the lower 88 iterations to play champions have the exact same probability of being seen once. Many people who have played League of Legends at the very beginning loved the game for how you can play any champion and do well. This feeling was completely lost and even champions who are actually performing well aren't being played often because of this responsibility we have. TL;DR is as annoying as . Fuck meta runes, get strong runes against . While you are at it, fuck bitches, get money.